← Issue №6/ week of Aug 9, 2026/ the whole section, in full

Colorectal, in full.

All 5 Colorectal papers in this issue, as full cards, ranked by clinical utility. The issue page carries the strongest few; this is the section, whole.

Sections this issue
IBD9Hepatology14Pancreas/Biliary5Endoscopy16Motility3Colorectal5
Filter

All 5, in full

most clinically useful first
Everything here, in one line each5
Colorectal rct · n=154 · Aug 10, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Three-Row Versus Two-Row Circular Staplers for Low Colorectal Anastomosis After Total Mesorectal Excision: A Single-Center, Randomized, Single-Blind, Phase III Trial (THREESTAPLER Study).

New evidencecolorectal surgery
Clinical takeawayNo change to current practice. Three-row staplers do not offer a leakage reduction advantage over established two-row technique; continue with two-row circular staplers for low anterior resection.
What it foundThree-row circular staplers did not reduce anastomotic leakage compared to two-row staplers (16.9% vs 15.6%, p=0.8); non-inferiority not established.
ContextAnastomotic leakage rates of 15-17% with both stapler types are consistent with current evidence. This negative non-inferiority trial does not support adopting three-row staplers as a technical improvement.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Tulina I … Tsarkov P · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal prospective cohort · Aug 14, 2026 · Dis Colon Rectum · IF 3.5

Day 1 Discharge for All Patients After Minimally Invasive Colon Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Practice-changingcolorectal surgeryhealth services
Clinical takeawayFor elective minimally invasive colon resection without stoma, target Day 1 discharge in eligible patients using predefined clinical criteria. This reduces median length of stay from 3 to 1 day with no increase in 30-day readmissions or severe complications. Gastroenterologists should counsel patients on this possibility and support the pathway in surgical planning and post-operative management.
What it foundDay 1 discharge rates increased from 4.6% to 65% after implementing a standardized pathway for minimally invasive colon resection without stoma, with no significant change in 30-day readmissions (p=0.43) or severe complications defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIb (p=0.91).
ContextThis builds on ERAS protocol evidence showing that early discharge after minimally invasive colon surgery is safe. Prior studies demonstrated feasibility of discharge within 24-72 hours, but adoption remained variable outside specialized centers. This prospective cohort confirms that systematic Day 1 discharge targeting is safe at scale and can be sustained over time, addressing the implementation gap.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Glazemakers ST … Bloemen JG · Diseases of the Colon and Rectum · IF 3.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal review · Aug 10, 2026 · JAMA · IF 63.1

Liquid Biopsies for Cancer: A Translational Science Review.

New evidencebiomarkertranslationalcolorectal cancer
Clinical takeawayConsider ctDNA testing for colorectal cancer patients to detect molecular relapse earlier than imaging and to identify molecular variants for therapy selection. However, optimal timing of testing and management of positive results in the absence of imaging abnormalities remain unresolved; implementation should await clarity through guidelines or institutional protocols.
What it foundctDNA detects colorectal cancer molecular relapse 8.7 months before standard imaging (median 5.5 vs 14.2 months; P<0.001), and higher ctDNA levels predict recurrence across cancers (e.g., urothelial carcinoma HR 20.69 for worse disease-free survival; 95% CI 9.63-44.43)
ContextctDNA is emerging as an early recurrence marker with strong prognostic correlation. This review synthesizes evidence that molecular relapse detection via ctDNA precedes imaging by months, supporting earlier intervention potential. However, optimal testing intervals, cost-effectiveness, and management of early-positive asymptomatic patients remain unresolved, limiting routine adoption.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Mezzanotte-Sharpe J … Park BH · JAMA · IF 63.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal prospective cohort · n=50 · Aug 10, 2026 · Am J Clin Nutrition · IF 6.5

Inflammation Hinders Anabolic Potential of Nutritional Support in Cancer: Findings from the PRIMe trial.

New evidencebiomarkertranslational
Clinical takeawayIn colorectal cancer (stage II-IV) patients receiving nutritional counseling, target at least 27 grams/day additional protein intake to achieve lean tissue gain. This post-hoc exploratory finding requires prospective validation before practice implementation. IL-6-based personalization is not recommended at this time, as IL-6 is not a standard clinical measure and the proposed effect substantially weakens over 12 weeks.
What it foundIn this post-hoc analysis, baseline IL-6, insulin, and specific amino acids (hydroxyproline, aspartate, taurine) explained 77% of lean tissue response variation at 6 weeks; however, by 12 weeks, IL-6 and methionine explained only 32% of variation, suggesting the effect attenuates over time. Positive lean tissue change occurred at daily protein increase of at least 27 grams.
ContextThis post-hoc mechanistic analysis from a single trial (n=50, stage II-IV colorectal cancer) suggests baseline IL-6 may influence protein anabolism, aligning with known biology. However, the weakening relationship at 12 weeks and post-hoc design indicate the finding is exploratory and may be confounded by unmeasured factors. The concrete finding-27 g/day protein threshold-is most actionable but needs prospective validation.
No standard claimed for this paper

Every paper is compared to the standard governing its question. This one is not: either no standard in the corpus matches it, or the comparison did not hold up on review and was withdrawn rather than published unverified. Both are logged.

Engelen MPKJ … Deutz NEP · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · IF 6.5 · PubMed ↗Permalink
Colorectal prospective cohort · n=535 · Aug 10, 2026 · Lancet GH · IF 39.1

A blood-based test for detection of advanced adenomas and colorectal cancer (DENEB): a multicentre diagnostic accuracy study.

Diagnosticcolorectal cancercolorectal cancer screeningadenomabiomarker
Clinical takeawayCannot assess clinical utility without results: sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for advanced adenoma detection are not reported in this incomplete abstract.
What it foundDENEB is a blood-based miRNA test developed through EDRN phase I-III validation in multicentre cohorts using RT-qPCR and machine learning to identify circulating miRNAs overexpressed in colorectal cancer and advanced adenomas, but the abstract ends in the methods section and does not report diagnostic accuracy.
ContextBlood-based CRC screening tests (Epi proColon, Septin9, Shield, Galleri-based tests) are emerging but variable advanced adenoma detection limits their prevention impact. This miRNA-based approach represents a potential alternative biomarker class pending performance data.
Emergingsuggested applicable standard· U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, et al.), "Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2017

Decision at stakewhether blood-based biomarker tests should be adopted as screening tools

Begin average-risk colorectal cancer screening at age 45 using a patient-centered shared-decision modality choice, colonoscopy every 10 years (preferred) or annual FIT as Tier 1 options, with multi-target stool DNA every 3 years, CT colonography every 5 years, or flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 to 10 years as Tier 2 alternatives. A positive stool-based test requires diagnostic colonoscopy, and stool tests should not be ordered for patients who would decline follow-up colonoscopy. Generally stop at age 75 with individualized decisions for ages 76-85 and no screening beyond 85.

U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, et al.), "Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients From the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer," Gastroenterology, 2017 · reviewed 2026-07-23 ↗
Mannucci A … Goel A · Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology · IF 39.1 · PubMed ↗Permalink
← Back to issue №6 Every section of this issue is one click away, at the top of this page. Follow Colorectal by RSS